Rigol's New DHO800 Oscilloscope unbox & teardown

[EEVblog]

This is why Dave says in the latest video he wouldn't discuss prices from other countries. I just brought an european perspective.

Yeah, it's just too complicated. And my videos are viewed in over a hundred countries. Just doing the top 5 or 10 countries makes it complicated enough.

[EEVblog]

making actual use of 12 bit requires some new features as well like filtering and being able to zoom in so you can look at a signal at like 10uV/div. Knowing Rigol's history, there will be tons of bugs that takes years to fix. People get all exited about new equipment and then are super happy with every firmware release that fixes problems/bugs that should not have been there in the first place. Look at how many people have returned the Rigol MSO5000. So, yeah, I'm sceptical.

Well I thought that some of these things were demo'd fairly concisely in Dave's 1 hour full review today.

No. Not by a long shot. Testing a modern DSO thouroughly takes several days of work to go through an extensive list of tests including tests that are designed to seek out the limits. And even then there might be surprises lingering. Keep in mind that Rigol (and Siglent too; look at how they copy Lecroy's UI instead of making an innovative UI themselves) are relatively new to the DSO game and have not learned all the ins & outs to make the right design choices. At least Rigol seems to be trying to take a stab at creating an innovative UI. Probably inspired by R&S.

Yeah, I barely scratched the surface and I've been using it for a week. There are limitless possible edge cases. Sometimes I get lucky and find bugs, sometimes not. e.g. in the R&S MXO4 buy pure luck I found an obscure bug that turning the serial decode baud rate control too fast locked up the scope.
In the DS1054Z a viewer found a hardware VCO jitter fault when you expanded the delayed timebase by precise multiples of 5us. Every reviewer and user missed that including myself. BTW, that doesn't happen on the DHO800, I tested it.

[EEVblog]

SDS1104X-E has many features that DHO800 does not have.

There's the DHO900 if you want those extra things.

Yes, as I mentioned it's not fair to compare the Siglent with the DHO800, the DHO900 is what you should compare it with.

[EEVblog]

LOL it is a six years newer design.  What exactly would you expect?

for siglent to keep working on developing new scopes, new generations of product.

They will of course, but unless they are working on ASIC's, it's unlikely they will be able to match Rigol's pricing for the foreseable future.

[2N3055]

SDS1104X-E has many features that DHO800 does not have.

There's the DHO900 if you want those extra things.

Yes, as I mentioned it's not fair to compare the Siglent with the DHO800, the DHO900 is what you should compare it with.

I agree.. And I was replying to his comparison.. But even with DHO900 there are still things like Bode Plots, fully functional segmented mode, history mode etc..

[Martin72]

Yes, as I mentioned it's not fair to compare the Siglent with the DHO800, the DHO900 is what you should compare it with.

And this although the DHO800 already "beats" and "destroys" the siglent...

[Martin72]

They will of course, but unless they are working on ASIC's, it's unlikely they will be able to match Rigol's pricing for the foreseable future.

But it could also be that siglent will no longer jump over every little stick held out to them by other low-cost providers and will rather think about offering something of higher quality.
As of today, I can't imagine that they will release anything below the SDS1000X HD in terms of 12bit.

[2N3055]

LOL it is a six years newer design.  What exactly would you expect?

for siglent to keep working on developing new scopes, new generations of product.

They will of course, but unless they are working on ASIC's, it's unlikely they will be able to match Rigol's pricing for the foreseable future.

In DHO series only ASIC is analog front end ASIC. Their ADC is not ASIC as much as local ADC source. That ADC can be replaced with any other ADC, and if you get good one at a good price, you can match them.

And Siglent already made it's own analog ASICs, a front end chip for 7000 and amp for differential high speed probe.
Truth is that Rigol had to develop it's own ADCs because they had problems in acquiring high performance chips because they burned the bridges with Keysight and that poisoned the well. Combine that with push in China to decouple and government incentives to do so and ADC development ensued...
Siglent is in much better situation that way and does not need it. If they do come to that point, they will react too. But truth is that ADC development is moving forward and some commercial designs might not be more expensive than in house low volume production.

[asmi]

in house low volume production.

Low volume?? What are you smoking? These things will sell like fresh cookies, as fast as Rigol can make them. Even those who don't really need it, will buy in anyway - the price is THAT good. With exception of perhaps resident Siglent shills and "elitists" with old used crap which is as old as I am - and I suspect even a good portion of those will still secretly buy it.

[Fungus]

Yes, as I mentioned it's not fair to compare the Siglent with the DHO800, the DHO900 is what you should compare it with.

And this although the DHO800 already "beats" and "destroys" the siglent...

Did nobody else watch Dave's video? No comments on the pulse response vs. the Siglent? How about the FFT speed?

These things are supposed to be the Siglent's differentiators vs. the "toy" oscilloscopes that Siglent owners love to turn up their noses at but this new Rigol is much better.

Imagine it was a Rigol showing distorted pulses like this? What would the Siglent boys say?


Rigol DHO for comparison:


PS: Looks like Siglent also gets the "fat traces" award now.

[ddv2005]

the first batch 804, and 924 vendor.bin

I assume they're encrypted or something because they're completely different inside.

Vendor.bin is encrypted by XXTEA encryption algorithm with hex key 34CD12AB34CD12AB34CD12AB34CD12AB
Decrypted 2 vendor files attached.

[EEVblog]

Did nobody else watch Dave's video? No comments on the pulse response vs. the Siglent? How about the FFT speed?
These things are supposed to be the Siglent's differentiators vs. the "toy" oscilloscopes that Siglent owners love to turn up their noses at but this new Rigol is much better.
PS: Looks like Siglent also gets the "fat traces" award now.

Same conditions too, the Leo Bodnar pulse gen connected direct to the scope 1M input.
And yes, the Rigol traces are thinner for the same bandwidth and sample rate. I'd love to have a full screen waveform option to make use of the resolution available. And if they could map it to the full HD HDMI output that would be mind blowing.

[EEVblog]

As of today, I can't imagine that they will release anything below the SDS1000X HD in terms of 12bit.

I had forgotten about that. Was back in April and still not released?
Maybe they might even have a re-think now?
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds1000x-hd-coming/
It has the advantage of a bigger screen, but it's the same resolution as the DHO800, and looses with NO HMDI output. nd presumably no VESA mount?

[sebyon]

They will of course, but unless they are working on ASIC's, it's unlikely they will be able to match Rigol's pricing for the foreseable future.

But it could also be that siglent will no longer jump over every little stick held out to them by other low-cost providers and will rather think about offering something of higher quality.
As of today, I can't imagine that they will release anything below the SDS1000X HD in terms of 12bit.

Considering the time and effort to develop a custom ASIC, and looking at the products released by Siglent over the last two years (all mid to high end equipment) you're probably on the money here. I have a feeling the SDS1000 HD will probably start around $1000 USD minimum and would be the lowest quality 12-bit they will offer. They're different markets at the end of the day.

Sometimes it's hard to look at equipment like the DHO800/900 on a forum with dedicated enthusiasts that will always look at niche functions and edge cases, but the truth of the matter is when you have a product under $1000 USD, you're targeting an audience that probably may not really know what they want in a scope, or don't really care about " scope X has some niche function" if they're losing out on resolution / newer hardware and have to spend a few hundred more.

So end of the day a newbie comes along and posts the inevitable forum post of  "I want a good first scope what can you recommend :DDDDD" with no other details, I will probably just say to get the DHO804.

[sebyon]

As of today, I can't imagine that they will release anything below the SDS1000X HD in terms of 12bit.

I had forgotten about that. Was back in April and still not released?
Maybe they might even have a re-think now?
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds1000x-hd-coming/
It has the advantage of a bigger screen, but it's the same resolution as the DHO800, and looses with NO HMDI output. nd presumably no VESA mount?

Pure speculation but I doubt they'd rethink at this point. The SDS1000x-HD has more sample depth, waveform updates, potentially greater bandwidth, and if I remember a crazy amount of math functions. For me when I first saw the SDS1000X HD it screamed "this is the 12-bit you buy if you actually need 12-bit but willing to sacrifice other areas and are "somewhat" on a budget". For example, the SDS2104X HD would have been the perfect scope for me but I can't afford the price tag attached to it, and was waiting for the SDS1104X HD

But I guess you can now argue the DHO800/900 potentially covers this too now. It's a really hard decision.

[tautech]

These things are supposed to be the Siglent's differentiators vs. the "toy" oscilloscopes that Siglent owners love to turn up their noses at but this new Rigol is much better.

Imagine it was a Rigol showing distorted pulses like this? What would the Siglent boys say?


Rigol DHO for comparison:


PS: Looks like Siglent also gets the "fat traces" award now.

You think, well yes this is about the level of all we can expect from a mouldy brain.
Dave says this:

The Leo Bodnar pulse gen connected direct to the scope 1M input.
And yes, the Rigol traces are thinner for the same bandwidth and sample rate.

Genius, this is what 12 bit DSO's provide however when they fail to reconstruct waveforms fully one needs wonder what's really going on.

Screenshots for study attached from 8 and 12 bit DSO's of a single 10 MHz pulse from a 29ps RT Bodnar pulser accurately reconstructing waveforms instead of hiding potentially valuable information.

[Fungus]

Screenshots for study attached from 8 and 12 bit DSO's of a single 10 MHz pulse from a 29ps RT Bodnar pulser accurately reconstructing waveforms instead of hiding potentially valuable information.

You're telling us the top of this pulse isn't supposed to be horizontal? That the upward slope shown here is correct?

[Fungus]

So end of the day a newbie comes along and posts the inevitable forum post of  "I want a good first scope what can you recommend :DDDDD" with no other details, I will probably just say to get the DHO804.

Yep, 100%. It's now the only correct answer to the newbie question.

[PartialDischarge]

Personally I'm missing accuracy tests. Not all 12-bit scopes are the same and accuracy in measurements (and offset) is important. This is usually what makes this huge price differences in ADCs!

The DHO800 has 1% accuracy, where the SDS2000 HD has 0.5% for example. Offset error is also about double.

[sebyon]

Personally I'm missing accuracy tests. Not all 12-bit scopes are the same and accuracy in measurements (and offset) is important. This is usually what makes this huge price differences in ADCs!

The DHO800 has 1% accuracy, where the SDS2000 HD has 0.5% for example. Offset error is also about double.

The SDS2000 HD is also ~5x the price 

[Fungus]

Personally I'm missing accuracy tests. Not all 12-bit scopes are the same and accuracy in measurements (and offset) is important. This is usually what makes this huge price differences in ADCs!

The DHO800 has 1% accuracy, where the SDS2000 HD has 0.5% for example. Offset error is also about double.

The SDS2000 HD is also ~5x the price 

More than 8x the price

https://siglentna.com/digital-oscilloscopes/sds2000x-hd-digital-storage-oscilloscope/

[PartialDischarge]

Personally I'm missing accuracy tests. Not all 12-bit scopes are the same and accuracy in measurements (and offset) is important. This is usually what makes this huge price differences in ADCs!

The DHO800 has 1% accuracy, where the SDS2000 HD has 0.5% for example. Offset error is also about double.

The SDS2000 HD is also ~5x the price 

Yes, and as I mentioned this is part of the price differences in ADCs, and a price I'm willing to pay because I'm interested in overall accuracy..

Just don't get into the false idea that all 12 bit scopes are the same and Rigol has somehow beat everyone here.

[Kleinstein]

The offset alone is the smaller problem - if at all one would care about the offset drift.

For the accuracy it is hard to compare just the specs. This are not hard numbers that one can measure on a few units, especially not when they come out new. The numbers are more like rough estimates with possibly company and engenier related bias. For the scale factor one anyway often has 1:10 probe and the probe alone can have more uncertainty.

What may matter and could be measured would be the linearity: with a good sine wave look at the harmincs in the FFT. Even this may need a few instruments for averaging individual variation.
Good linearity may be relevant for using the 12 bit scope as a low cost spectrum analyser substitute. Here the extra bits at the ADC really help.

[2N3055]

in house low volume production.

Low volume?? What are you smoking? These things will sell like fresh cookies, as fast as Rigol can make them. Even those who don't really need it, will buy in anyway - the price is THAT good. With exception of perhaps resident Siglent shills and "elitists" with old used crap which is as old as I am - and I suspect even a good portion of those will still secretly buy it.

They ain't gonna make the in same volume in same volume as Analog devices or TI... Or a Chinese source that sells on open market. It is only for internal use..... Low volume in comparison... I didn't mean they'll make 100 pieces at that's it..

[iMo]

What we should see in practice then?
For example with by 50ohm shorted BNC channel input at 1mV range (at a specific sample rate and BW).
What AC.RMS (or standard deviation or peak-peak) is to expect with 8bit and 12bit scopes?
Or what 12bit/8bit ratio of the noise should we see?
So far - based on the videos - I do not see the ratio to be really 12bit/8bit..

PS: for example my borrowed 20y old DS1062CA shows 440uVpp noise terminated with 50ohm (1mV/div range, BWlimit ON, 100ms/div timebase)..